This is interesting: An unretouched cover photo of a FEMALE movie star and the world goes bananas. What about when male stars are constantly photographed unretouched? When George Clooney or Brad Pitt show their wrinkles - what...no parade about them becoming real? This is such a sexist double-standard. The bottom line is we all know magazine covers are fake and movies are fake, hell, even acting is fake. So I ask, is this really about what is real or fake? Or is this about what people want to believe? I think it's about what people want to believe and they always want to believe the fantasy because that is what is entertaining and hopeful. Fantasy is what captures the imagination and gives us escape from the flaws we all have and see in the reality of our everyday life. If we wanted reality, we wouldn't pay 6.95 for a magazine or 9.50 for a movie ticket, when we can get it for free outside our front door. Reality isn't always as beautiful and the people want what is beautiful. I like the cover, and I love Cate Blanchett, but I wouldn't mind the unretouched photo if the makeup was on point (LOL). See what I mean, it's all about a beautiful image whether it comes from lighting, retouching or makeup, it's got to be inspiring. I would feel more inspired if she had on a good set of eyelashes and a stronger hair style! Who cares about wrinkles...it's how you rock them and she is rocking them with this jacket - but her face needed some pop and her hair needed some juejing. Let's keep it real (pun intended), Perfect skin does not make a woman beautiful. Cate is beautiful because she has a special symmetry and shape to her face: cheek bones, eyes, nose, lips. Ice blue eyes and a soft pale complexion and hair is what gives so much impact to her look. Would it be a deceitful beauty if she were to wear a full coverage foundation in this picture (LOL). I mean, can't we be real and stunning at the same time? Maybe not......not so much......hmmm.